Of ventures which require outside funding, one of the greatest predictors of successful fundraising by founders can be trust built with the capitalists in ways that can not be accomplished overnight.
More talent is certainly better but an ambtious founder who is not nicely familiar with trusting capitalists who are capable and willing to back their type of efforts, will have an extreme disadvantage compared to those who are.
Regardless of talent.
Especially when the ideal talent may be like a black swan anyway, and nobody knows when or if it may come up anytime soon or at all.
In the mean time there is a noticeable trend where the lesser talent prevails exclusively, and eventually that is the only preferred pattern recognized.
Talentlessness would be extreme as well as idealness for both founders and capitalists, but it does look like all have some work to do if they want to effectively leverage more overlooked opportunities.
>Is it talentless-ness all the way to the top?
Always has been in some cases. Now you're talking extreme.
When the funding is strong enough to overcome all obstacles, talent may not tend to be just second-fiddle, it can become expendable.
OTOH when all talent is lost, so many times then only extreme funding will enable continued operation. Also enough to overcome all obstacles, and it can be difficult for talent to return or have a path to leadership then.
More talent is certainly better but an ambtious founder who is not nicely familiar with trusting capitalists who are capable and willing to back their type of efforts, will have an extreme disadvantage compared to those who are.
Regardless of talent.
Especially when the ideal talent may be like a black swan anyway, and nobody knows when or if it may come up anytime soon or at all.
In the mean time there is a noticeable trend where the lesser talent prevails exclusively, and eventually that is the only preferred pattern recognized.
Talentlessness would be extreme as well as idealness for both founders and capitalists, but it does look like all have some work to do if they want to effectively leverage more overlooked opportunities.
>Is it talentless-ness all the way to the top?
Always has been in some cases. Now you're talking extreme.
When the funding is strong enough to overcome all obstacles, talent may not tend to be just second-fiddle, it can become expendable.
OTOH when all talent is lost, so many times then only extreme funding will enable continued operation. Also enough to overcome all obstacles, and it can be difficult for talent to return or have a path to leadership then.